ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1999
Experiences of general practitioners and practice nurses of training courses in evidence-based health care: a qualitative study.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Can the theoretical domains framework account for the implementation of clinical quality interventions?BMC health services research · 2013Article
- What's the E for EBM?BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2004Article
- A comparative case study of two models of a clinical informaticist service.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical governance will require general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses (PNs) to become competent in finding, appraising, and implementing research evidence--the skills of evidence-based health care (EBHC).
aimTo report the experiences of GPs and PNs in training in this area.
methodWe held 30 in-depth, semi-structured interviews throughout North Thames region with three groups of informants: primary care practitioners recruited from the mailing lists of established EBHC courses; organizers and teachers on these courses; and educational advisers from Royal Colleges, universities, and postgraduate departments. Detailed qualitative analysis was undertaken to identify themes from each of these interview groups.
resultsAt the time of the fieldwork for this study (late 1997), remarkably few GPs or PNs had attended any formal EBHC courses in our region. Perceived barriers to attendance on courses included inconsistency in marketing terminology, cultural issues (e.g. EBHC being perceived as one aspect of rapid and unwanted change in the workplace), lack of confidence in the subject matter (especially mathematics and statistics), lack of time, and practical and financial constraints. Our interviews suggested, however, that the principles and philosophy of EBHC are beginning to permeate traditional lecture-based continuing medical education courses, and consultant colleagues increasingly seek to make their advice 'evidence based'.
conclusionWe offer some preliminary recommendations for the organizers of EBHC courses for primary care. These include offering a range of flexible training, being explicit about course content, recognizing differences in professional culture between primary and secondary care and between doctors and nurses, and addressing issues of funding and accreditation at national level. Introducing EBHC through traditional topic-based postgraduate teaching programmes may be more acceptable and more effective than providing dedicated courses in its theoretical principles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10621987PMC1313472What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.